Gavin Salam. CERN, Princeton & LPTHE/CNRS (Paris) Work performed with Mathieu Rubin and Sebastian Sapeta, arxiv:
|
|
|
- Jocelyn Hart
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 Giant K factors Gavin Salam CERN, Princeton & LPTHE/CNRS (Paris) Work performed with Mathieu Rubin and Sebastian Sapeta, arxiv: Fermilab Theory Seminar 19 May 2011
2 Giant K-factors FNAL) / 31 [Introduction] What kinds of searches at colliders? dσ / dm [log scale] mass peak QCD prediction Signal mass New resonance (e.g. Z ) where you see all decay products and reconstruct an invariant mass QCD may: swamp signal smear signal leptonic case easy; hadronic case harder
3 Giant K-factors FNAL) / 31 [Introduction] What kinds of searches at colliders? dσ / dm [log scale] QCD prediction Signal New resonance (e.g. Z ) where you see all decay products and reconstruct an invariant mass QCD may: swamp signal smear signal leptonic case easy; hadronic case harder mass
4 Giant K-factors FNAL) / 31 [Introduction] What kinds of searches at colliders? dσ / dm [log scale] mass edge QCD prediction Signal mass New resonance (e.g. R-parity conserving SUSY), where undetected new stable particle escapes detection. Reconstruct only part of an invariant mass kinematic edge. QCD may: swamp signal smear signal
5 Giant K-factors FNAL) / 31 [Introduction] What kinds of searches at colliders? dσ / dm [log scale] high mass excess QCD prediction Signal mass Unreconstructed SUSY cascade. Study effective mass (sum of all transverse momenta). Broad excess at high mass scales. Knowledge of backgrounds is crucial is declaring discovery. QCD is one way of getting handle on background.
6 Giant K-factors FNAL) / 31 dσ / dm [log scale] Signal? dσ / dm [log scale] Signal? dσ / dm [log scale] Signal? mass mass mass THIS TALK
7 Giant K-factors FNAL) / 31 dσ / dm [log scale] Signal? dσ / dm [log scale] Signal? dσ / dm [log scale] Signal? mass mass mass THIS TALK
8 Giant K-factors FNAL) / 31 [Introduction] SUSY example: gluino pair production Signal q q χ 0 g ~ g ~ q ~ q ~ g ~ g g χ 0 q q
9 Giant K-factors FNAL) / 31 [Introduction] SUSY example: gluino pair production Signal jet q jet q χ 0 g ~ g ~ q E/ T E/ T ~ q ~ g ~ g g χ 0 q jet q jet
10 Giant K-factors FNAL) / 31 [Introduction] SUSY example: gluino pair production Signal Background g jet q ~ g jet q ~ q χ 0 E/ T g g q q E/ T χ 0 ~ q q jet q jet ~ g ~ g g q g Z ν ν
11 Giant K-factors FNAL) / 31 [Introduction] SUSY example: gluino pair production Signal Background g jet q ~ g jet q ~ q χ 0 E/ T g jet q g jet q E/ T χ 0 ~ q q jet q jet ~ g ~ g g q jet g Z jet ν ν E/ T
12 Giant K-factors FNAL) / 31 [Introduction] SUSY searches: what excesses?
![[Introduction] SUSY](/docs-images/91/106038153/images/13-0.jpg "searches: what excesses?")
13 [Introduction] SUSY searches: what excesses? SUSY factor 5 10 excess Giant K-factors (@ FNAL) / 31
14 Giant K-factors FNAL) / 31 [Introduction] How accurate is perturbative QCD? σ = c 0 +c 1 α s +c 2 α 2 s +... α s 0.1 That implies LO QCD (just c 0 ) should be accurate to within 10% It isn t Rules of thumb: LO good to within factor of 2 NLO good to within scale uncertainty This talk is about an example where these rules fail spectacularly, the lessons we learn, and the solutions we can apply.
15 Giant K-factors FNAL) / 31 [Introduction] How accurate is perturbative QCD? σ = c 0 +c 1 α s +c 2 α 2 s +... α s 0.1 That implies LO QCD (just c 0 ) should be accurate to within 10% It isn t Anastasiou, Melnikov & Petriello 04 Anastasiou, Dissertori & Stöckli 07 Rules of thumb: LO good to within factor of 2 NLO good to within scale uncertainty This talk is about an example where these rules fail spectacularly, the lessons we learn, and the solutions we can apply.
16 Giant K-factors FNAL) / 31 [Introduction] How accurate is perturbative QCD? σ = c 0 +c 1 α s +c 2 α 2 s +... α s 0.1 That implies LO QCD (just c 0 ) should be accurate to within 10% It isn t Anastasiou, Melnikov & Petriello 04 Anastasiou, Dissertori & Stöckli 07 Rules of thumb: LO good to within factor of 2 NLO good to within scale uncertainty This talk is about an example where these rules fail spectacularly, the lessons we learn, and the solutions we can apply.
17 Giant K-factors FNAL) / 31 [Introduction] How accurate is perturbative QCD? σ = c 0 +c 1 α s +c 2 α 2 s +... α s 0.1 That implies LO QCD (just c 0 ) should be accurate to within 10% It isn t Anastasiou, Melnikov & Petriello 04 Anastasiou, Dissertori & Stöckli 07 Rules of thumb: LO good to within factor of 2 NLO good to within scale uncertainty This talk is about an example where these rules fail spectacularly, the lessons we learn, and the solutions we can apply.
![Giant K-factors (@ FNAL) 2011-05-19 7 / 31 [Introduction] Control samples We don t always have NLO for the background (e.g. Z+4 jets, a 2 5 process).](/docs-images/91/106038153/images/18-0.jpg "Though amazing recent progress 2 4: Blackhat, Rocket, Helac-NLO, BDDP 2 5 (W+4j): Blackhat Must then rely on LO (matched with parton showers). How does one verify it?")
18 Giant K-factors FNAL) / 31 [Introduction] Control samples We don t always have NLO for the background (e.g. Z+4 jets, a 2 5 process). Though amazing recent progress 2 4: Blackhat, Rocket, Helac-NLO, BDDP 2 5 (W+4j): Blackhat Must then rely on LO (matched with parton showers). How does one verify it? Common data-driven procedure: [roughly] Get control sample at low p t SUSY should be small(er) contamination there Once validated, trust LO prediction at high-p t
19 Giant K-factors FNAL) / 31 [An example] Is this safe? A conservative QCD theory point of view: It s hard to be sure: since we can t (yet) calculate Z+4 jets beyond LO. But we would tend to think it is safe, as long as control data are within usual factor of two of LO prediction Illustrate issues with toy example: Z +jet production It s known to NLO and a candidate for first 2 2 NNLO e + e γ /Z 3 jets, NNLO: Gehrman et al 08, Weinzierl 08 But let s pretend we only know it to LO, and look at the p t distribution of the hardest jet (no other cuts keep it simple) Z g q (=jet)
20 [An example] Toy data, control sample dσ Z+jets /dp t [fb/gev] 1e Z + jet cross section (LHC) LO toy data MCFM 5.2 CTEQ6M stage 1: get control sample Check LO v. data at low p t normalisation off by factor 1.5 (consistent with expectations) So renormalise LO by K-fact shape OKish Don t be too fussy: SUSY could bias higher p t k t alg., R= µ 2 = m Z 2 + p 2 t,z p t,jet [GeV] Giant K-factors (@ FNAL) / 31
21 [An example] Toy data, control sample dσ Z+jets /dp t [fb/gev] 1e Z + jet cross section (LHC) LO toy data LO x K-fact (1.5) MCFM 5.2 CTEQ6M stage 1: get control sample Check LO v. data at low p t normalisation off by factor 1.5 (consistent with expectations) So renormalise LO by K-fact shape OKish Don t be too fussy: SUSY could bias higher p t k t alg., R= µ 2 = m Z 2 + p 2 t,z p t,jet [GeV] Giant K-factors (@ FNAL) / 31
22 [An example] Toy data, control sample dσ Z+jets /dp t [fb/gev] 1e Z + jet cross section (LHC) LO toy data LO x K-fact (1.5) MCFM 5.2 CTEQ6M stage 1: get control sample Check LO v. data at low p t normalisation off by factor 1.5 (consistent with expectations) So renormalise LO by K-fact shape OKish Don t be too fussy: SUSY could bias higher p t k t alg., R= µ 2 = m Z 2 + p 2 t,z p t,jet [GeV] Giant K-factors (@ FNAL) / 31
23 [An example] Toy data, high p t dσ Z+jets /dp t [fb/gev] Z + jet cross section (LHC) LO x K-fact (1.5) MCFM 5.2 CTEQ6M k t alg., R=0.7 stage 2: look at high p t good agreement at low p t, by construction excess of factor 10 at high p t check scale dependence of LO [NB: not always done except e.g. Alwall et al ] still big excess µ 2 = m Z 2 + p 2 t,z p t,jet [GeV] Giant K-factors (@ FNAL) / 31
24 [An example] Toy data, high p t dσ Z+jets /dp t [fb/gev] Z + jet cross section (LHC) LO x K-fact (1.5) toy data MCFM 5.2 CTEQ6M k t alg., R=0.7 stage 2: look at high p t good agreement at low p t, by construction excess of factor 10 at high p t check scale dependence of LO [NB: not always done except e.g. Alwall et al ] still big excess µ 2 = m Z 2 + p 2 t,z p t,jet [GeV] Giant K-factors (@ FNAL) / 31
25 [An example] Toy data, high p t dσ Z+jets /dp t [fb/gev] Z + jet cross section (LHC) LO x K-fact (1.5) toy data LO scale dep MCFM 5.2 CTEQ6M k t alg., R=0.7 µ 2 2 = {m Z + p 2 t,z, p t,jets 2, HT 2 2, M Z/4} p t,jet [GeV] stage 2: look at high p t good agreement at low p t, by construction excess of factor 10 at high p t check scale dependence of LO [NB: not always done except e.g. Alwall et al ] still big excess Giant K-factors (@ FNAL) / 31
26 Giant K-factors FNAL) / 31 [An example] What s in the toy data? Is it: QCD + extra signal? just QCD? But then where does a K-factor of 10 come from? Here it s just a toy illustration. Later this year it may be for real: Do Nature / Science / PRL accept the paper? Discovery of New Physics at the TeV scale We report a 5.7σ excess in MET + jets production that is consistent with a signal of new physics... Do we proceed immediately with a linear collider? It ll take years to build; the sooner we start the better At what energy? It would be a shame to be locked in to the wrong energy...
27 Giant K-factors FNAL) / 31 [An example] What s in the toy data? Is it: QCD + extra signal? just QCD? But then where does a K-factor of 10 come from? Here it s just a toy illustration. Later this year it may be for real: Do Nature / Science / PRL accept the paper? Discovery of New Physics at the TeV scale We report a 5.7σ excess in MET + jets production that is consistent with a signal of new physics... Do we proceed immediately with a linear collider? It ll take years to build; the sooner we start the better At what energy? It would be a shame to be locked in to the wrong energy...
28 Giant K-factors FNAL) / 31 [An example] Open the box... dσ Z+jets /dp t [fb/gev] Z + jet cross section (LHC) LO x K-fact (1.5) toy data LO scale dep MCFM 5.2 CTEQ6M k t alg., R=0.7 µ 2 2 = {m Z + p 2 t,z, p t,jets 2, HT 2 2, M Z/4} p t,jet [GeV] Unlike for SUSY multi-jet searches, in the Z +jet case we do have NLO. Once NLO is included the excess disappears The toy data were just the upper edge of the NLO band Example based on background work for Butterworth, Davison, Rubin & GPS 08 Related observations also by Bauer & Lange 09; Denner, Dittmaier, Kasprzik & Muck 09 Hold on a second: how does QCD give a K-factor O(5 10)? NB: DYRAD, MCFM consistent
29 Giant K-factors FNAL) / 31 [An example] Open the box... dσ Z+jets /dp t [fb/gev] Z + jet cross section (LHC) LO x K-fact (1.5) toy data LO scale dep NLO MCFM 5.2 CTEQ6M k t alg., R=0.7 µ 2 2 = {m Z + p 2 t,z, p t,jets 2, HT 2 2, M Z/4} p t,jet [GeV] Unlike for SUSY multi-jet searches, in the Z +jet case we do have NLO. Once NLO is included the excess disappears The toy data were just the upper edge of the NLO band Example based on background work for Butterworth, Davison, Rubin & GPS 08 Related observations also by Bauer & Lange 09; Denner, Dittmaier, Kasprzik & Muck 09 Hold on a second: how does QCD give a K-factor O(5 10)? NB: DYRAD, MCFM consistent
30 Giant K-factors FNAL) / 31 [An example] Open the box... dσ Z+jets /dp t [fb/gev] Z + jet cross section (LHC) LO x K-fact (1.5) toy data LO scale dep NLO MCFM 5.2 CTEQ6M k t alg., R=0.7 µ 2 2 = {m Z + p 2 t,z, p t,jets 2, HT 2 2, M Z/4} p t,jet [GeV] Unlike for SUSY multi-jet searches, in the Z +jet case we do have NLO. Once NLO is included the excess disappears The toy data were just the upper edge of the NLO band Example based on background work for Butterworth, Davison, Rubin & GPS 08 Related observations also by Bauer & Lange 09; Denner, Dittmaier, Kasprzik & Muck 09 Hold on a second: how does QCD give a K-factor O(5 10)? NB: DYRAD, MCFM consistent
31 Giant K-factors FNAL) / 31 [An example] What about other observables? dσ/dv [fb / 100 GeV] p t of Z-boson LO NLO K 1.5 pp, 14 TeV anti-k t, R=0.7 p t,j1 > 200 GeV, Z e + e V = p t,z [GeV] p t of jet 1 LO NLO K 5 K V = p t,j1 [GeV] H T,jets = jets p t,j LO NLO MCFM 5.7, CTEQ6M V = H T,jets [GeV] Giant K-factors
32 Giant K-factors FNAL) / 31 [An example] Why the large K-factor? Leading Order Next-to-Leading Order α s α EW α 2 sα EW LHC probes scales EW scale, s M Z. EW bosons are light. New logarithmically enhanced topologies appear.
33 Giant K-factors FNAL) / 31 [An example] Why the large K-factor? Leading Order Next-to-Leading Order α s α EW α 2 sα EW LHC probes scales EW scale, s M Z. EW bosons are light. New logarithmically enhanced topologies appear.
34 Giant K-factors FNAL) / 31 [An example] Why the large K-factor? Leading Order Next-to-Leading Order α s α EW α 2 sα EW ln 2 p t M Z LHC probes scales EW scale, s M Z. EW bosons are light. New logarithmically enhanced topologies appear.
35 Giant K-factors FNAL) / 31 [An example] Why the large K-factor? Leading Order Next-to-Leading Order α s α EW α 2 sα EW ln 2 p t M Z LHC probes scales EW scale, s M Z. EW bosons are light. New logarithmically enhanced topologies appear.
36 Giant K-factors FNAL) / 31 [An example] Why the large K-factor? Leading Order Next-to-Leading Order α s α EW α 2 sα EW ln 2 p t M Z LHC probes scales EW scale, s M Z. EW bosons are light. New logarithmically enhanced topologies appear. NLO driven in part by qq parton luminosity: large at pp colliders
37 Giant K-factors FNAL) / 31 Is this example not a little contrived? After all, experiments would surely notice unexpected event topology such as that here. We actually first saw the problem in a more complex process: Wb b as a background to boosted Higgs searches (with wrong cuts). The more complicated the process, the trickier the diagnosis of the problem. It s enough to get this wrong once, leading to unwarranted press-releases and major subsequent embarassment.
38 Giant K-factors FNAL) / 31 In day-to-day work the experiments don t just use LO. Instead, they Take Z + jet, Z + 2 jet samples, etc., Attach a parton shower to each of them and combine with procedures such as MLM matching or CKKW matching.
39 Giant K-factors FNAL) / 31 [MLM matching] dσ/dp t,z [fb / 100 GeV] Testing Alpgen + Herwig + MLM Matching p t of Z-boson LO NLO pp, 14 TeV p t,z [GeV]
40 Giant K-factors FNAL) / 31 [MLM matching] dσ/dp t,z [fb / 100 GeV] Testing Alpgen + Herwig + MLM Matching p t of Z-boson LO NLO Alpgen+HW6 Z+jet pp, 14 TeV p t,z [GeV]
41 Giant K-factors FNAL) / 31 [MLM matching] dσ/dp t,z [fb / 100 GeV] Testing Alpgen + Herwig + MLM Matching p t of Z-boson LO NLO Alpgen+HW6 Z+jet p t,z [GeV] pp, 14 TeV Alpgen+HW6 Z+jet/Z+2jets All predictions similar and stable
42 Giant K-factors FNAL) / 31 [MLM matching] dσ/dp t,j1 [fb / 100 GeV] Testing Alpgen + Herwig + MLM Matching p t of jet 1 LO NLO pp, 14 TeV p t,j1 [GeV]
43 Giant K-factors FNAL) / 31 [MLM matching] dσ/dp t,j1 [fb / 100 GeV] Testing Alpgen + Herwig + MLM Matching p t of jet 1 LO NLO Alpgen+HW6 Z+jet pp, 14 TeV Showered Z+j LO p t,j1 [GeV]
44 Giant K-factors FNAL) / 31 [MLM matching] dσ/dp t,j1 [fb / 100 GeV] Testing Alpgen + Herwig + MLM Matching p t of jet 1 LO NLO Alpgen+HW6 Z+jet p t,j1 [GeV] pp, 14 TeV Alpgen+HW6 Z+jet/Z+2jets Showered Z+j LO Showered Z+j/Z+2j NLO
45 Giant K-factors FNAL) / 31 [MLM matching] dσ/dh T,jets [fb / 100 GeV] Testing Alpgen + Herwig + MLM Matching H T,jets = jets p t,j LO NLO pp, 14 TeV H T,jets [GeV]
46 Giant K-factors FNAL) / 31 [MLM matching] Testing Alpgen + Herwig + MLM Matching dσ/dh T,jets [fb / 100 GeV] H T,jets = jets p t,j LO NLO Alpgen+HW6 Z+jet pp, 14 TeV Showered Z+j LO cf. also de Aquino, Hagiwara, Li & Maltoni H T,jets [GeV]
47 Giant K-factors FNAL) / 31 [MLM matching] Testing Alpgen + Herwig + MLM Matching dσ/dh T,jets [fb / 100 GeV] H T,jets = jets p t,j LO NLO Alpgen+HW6 Z+jet H T,jets [GeV] pp, 14 TeV Alpgen+HW6 Z+jet/Z+2jets Showered Z+j LO Showered Z+j/Z+2j NLO cf. also de Aquino, Hagiwara, Li & Maltoni 11
48 Giant K-factors FNAL) / 31 It s great that (the widely-used) MLM/CKKW matching procedure correctly approximates the NLO giant K-factor. But what happens at NNLO? a natural question when LO NLO convergence is poor Despite 10 years calculation, the answer is not yet known Our strategy: get an approximation to NNLO specifically, we will approximate a subset of the loop contributions, with a method dubbed LoopSim
49 Giant K-factors FNAL) / 31 [MLM matching] Ingredients of (N)NLO LO
50 Giant K-factors FNAL) / 31 [MLM matching] Ingredients of (N)NLO NLO
51 Giant K-factors FNAL) / 31 [MLM matching] Ingredients of (N)NLO NNLO
52 Giant K-factors FNAL) / 31 [MLM matching] Approximations to (N)NLO nlo Our naming scheme: For each loop that we approximate, replace N n nlo: approx 1-loop diagrams Exact Approximate
53 Giant K-factors FNAL) / 31 [MLM matching] Approximations to (N)NLO n nlo Our naming scheme: For each loop that we approximate, replace N n Exact Approximate nlo: approx 1-loop diagrams n nlo: approx 1- and 2-loops
54 Giant K-factors FNAL) / 31 [MLM matching] Approximations to (N)NLO nnlo Our naming scheme: For each loop that we approximate, replace N n Exact Approximate nlo: approx 1-loop diagrams n nlo: approx 1- and 2-loops nnlo: approx 2-loop only
55 Giant K-factors FNAL) / 31 First try Z + nlo: Take the leading process [Z + LO] and add in process with one extra jet. [i.e. include Z + 2 LO] approximate the 1-loop Z+jet term, by requiring cancellation of all divergences [those from singly unresolved limit of Z + 2 jets]
56 Giant K-factors FNAL) / 31 [LoopSim] [The idea] The LoopSim idea: nlo p 1 p 3 p 2 Z + 2 partons M 2 (p 1,p 2,p 3 ) Identify softest or most collinear parton [with help of a jet algorithm] Loop it remove it from event, reshuffle other momenta; weight of looped event is ( 1) weight of tree-level event
57 Giant K-factors FNAL) / 31 [LoopSim] [The idea] The LoopSim idea: nlo softest p 1 p 3 p 2 Z + 2 partons M 2 (p 1,p 2,p 3 ) Identify softest or most collinear parton [with help of a jet algorithm] Loop it remove it from event, reshuffle other momenta; weight of looped event is ( 1) weight of tree-level event
58 Giant K-factors FNAL) / 31 [LoopSim] [The idea] softest p 1 The LoopSim idea: nlo looped ~ p 1 p 3 + p 2 Z + 2 partons M 2 (p 1,p 2,p 3 ) ~ p 2 Z + 1 parton + 1 sim. loop M 2 (p 1,p 2,p 3 ) Identify softest or most collinear parton [with help of a jet algorithm] Loop it remove it from event, reshuffle other momenta; weight of looped event is ( 1) weight of tree-level event
59 Giant K-factors FNAL) / 31 [LoopSim] [The idea] softest p 1 The LoopSim idea: nlo looped ~ p 1 p 3 + p 2 Z + 2 partons M 2 (p 1,p 2,p 3 ) ~ p 2 Z + 1 parton + 1 sim. loop M 2 (p 1,p 2,p 3 ) Identify softest or most collinear parton [with help of a jet algorithm] Loop it remove it from event, reshuffle other momenta; weight of looped event is ( 1) weight of tree-level event This cancels all the single-unresolved divergences in the Z+2 events
60 Giant K-factors FNAL) / 31 [LoopSim] [The idea] nlo results (K-factors, normalised to LO) K-factor wrt LO p t of Z-boson LO NLO nlo (µ dep) nlo (R LS dep) MCFM 5.7, CTEQ6M pp, 14 TeV anti-k t, R=0.7 p t,j1 > 200 GeV K-factor wrt LO p t of jet 1 LO NLO nlo (µ dep) nlo (R LS dep) MCFM 5.7, CTEQ6M pp, 14 TeV anti-k t, R=0.7 p t,j1 > 200 GeV K-factor wrt LO H T,jets = jets p t,j MCFM 5.7, CTEQ6M pp, 14 TeV anti-k t, R=0.7 p t,j1 > 200 GeV LO NLO nlo (µ dep) nlo (R LS dep) p t,z (GeV) p t,j1 (GeV) H T,jets (GeV) When the K-factors are large, nlo agrees well with NLO Works with similar quality to MLM matching
61 Giant K-factors FNAL) / 31 MLM/CKKW matching also effectively provide nlo type accuracy How dooes LoopSim compare to MLM/CKKW? 1. Does not rely on shower ( : simplicity; : not easily integrated with shower MCs) 2. Does not need arbitrary separation of Z+1/Z+2/etc. samples with (hard-to-choose) momentum cutoff 3. Can easily be extended beyond LO matching
62 Giant K-factors FNAL) / 31 [LoopSim] [ nnlo] LoopSim at n nlo and nnlo add tree-level Z+3, cancel divergences in single + doubly unresolved limits: n nlo p 1 p 3 p 4 p 2 M 2 (p 1,p 2,p 3,p 4)
63 Giant K-factors FNAL) / 31 [LoopSim] [ nnlo] LoopSim at n nlo and nnlo add tree-level Z+3, cancel divergences in single + doubly unresolved limits: n nlo p 1 ~ p1 p ~ 1 p 3 p 4 + ~ p 4 + ~ p 3 + p 2 p ~ 2 p ~ 2 M 2 (p 1,p 2,p 3,p 4) M 2 (p 1,p 2,p 3,p 4) M 2 (p 1,p 2,p 3,p 4) Separately loop either of the 2 softest emissions: provides approx of 1-loop
64 Giant K-factors FNAL) / 31 [LoopSim] [ nnlo] LoopSim at n nlo and nnlo add tree-level Z+3, cancel divergences in single + doubly unresolved limits: n nlo p 1 ~ p1 p ~ 1 ~ p1 p 3 p 4 + ~ p 4 + ~ p 3 + p 2 p ~ 2 p ~ 2 p ~ 2 M 2 (p 1,p 2,p 3,p 4) M 2 (p 1,p 2,p 3,p 4) M 2 (p 1,p 2,p 3,p 4) + M 2 (p 1,p 2,p 3,p 4) Simultaneously loop each of the 2 softest emissions: provides approx of 2-loop Total of tree plus approx 1- and 2-loop pieces gives zero
65 Giant K-factors FNAL) / 31 [LoopSim] [ nnlo] LoopSim at n nlo and nnlo add tree-level Z+3, cancel divergences in single + doubly unresolved limits: n nlo p 1 ~ p1 p ~ 1 ~ p1 p 3 p 4 + ~ p 4 + ~ p 3 + p 2 p ~ 2 p ~ 2 p ~ 2 M 2 (p 1,p 2,p 3,p 4) M 2 (p 1,p 2,p 3,p 4) M 2 (p 1,p 2,p 3,p 4) + M 2 (p 1,p 2,p 3,p 4) Simultaneously loop each of the 2 softest emissions: provides approx of 2-loop Total of tree plus approx 1- and 2-loop pieces gives zero add in (exact 1-loop) (approximate 1-loop) + extra simulated 2-loop piece to cancel new Z+2@1-loop divergences This is nnlo
66 Giant K-factors FNAL) / 31 [LoopSim] [ nnlo] Expected accuracy of nnlo The 2-loop piece has the topology of the LO diagram. The mistake we make in approximating it should therefore be a pure O(αs 2 ) correction, without any large enhancements from new NLO type topologies. σ nnlo = σ NNLO +O ( αs 2 σ ) LO ( )) α 2 = σ NNLO (1+O s K NNLO K NNLO = σ NNLO σ LO K NLO 1 The relative contribution of the neglected piece is suppressed by the large K-factor. nnlo should be a good approximation to NNLO when the K-factor is large and due to new higher-order topologies.
67 Giant K-factors FNAL) / 31 Testing nnlo, in 3 processes [making use of existing NLO calculations] 1. Z@NLO and Z+j@NLO Z@ nnlo with MCFM; compare to exact NNLO from DYNNLO 2. Z+j@NLO and Z+2j@NLO Z+j@ nnlo 3. 2j@NLO and 3j@NLO 2j@ nnlo with MCFM with NLOjet++
68 [ nnlo results] [Drell-Yan] 10 5 Validation: Drell-Yan lepton p t, nnlo v. NNLO nlo v. NLO LO NLO nlo dσ/dp t,max [fb/gev] pp, 14 TeV 66 < m e e < 116 GeV p t,max [GeV] Z (i.e. DY) with Z+j from MCFM & LoopSim For p tell 1 2 M Z +Γ Z (giant K-factor!) it had to work For p t,l 1 2 M Z +Γ Z it s remarkable that it still works
69 [ nnlo results] [Drell-Yan] dσ/dp t,max [fb/gev] Validation: Drell-Yan lepton p t, nnlo v. NNLO nlo v. NLO LO NLO nlo K factor wrt NLO nnlo v. NNLO NLO nnlo (µ dep) nnlo (R LS dep) NNLO pp, 14 TeV 66 < m e e < 116 GeV p t,max [GeV] pp, 14 TeV 66 < m e + e - < 116 GeV p t,max [GeV] NNLO from DYNNLO, Z (i.e. DY) with Z+j from MCFM & LoopSim For p tell 1 2 M Z +Γ Z (giant K-factor!) it had to work For p t,l 1 2 M Z +Γ Z it s remarkable that it still works
70 [ nnlo results] [Drell-Yan] dσ/dp t,max [fb/gev] Validation: Drell-Yan lepton p t, nnlo v. NNLO nlo v. NLO LO NLO nlo K factor wrt NLO nnlo v. NNLO NLO nnlo (µ dep) nnlo (R LS dep) NNLO pp, 14 TeV 66 < m e e < 116 GeV p t,max [GeV] pp, 14 TeV 66 < m e + e - < 116 GeV p t,max [GeV] NNLO from DYNNLO, Z (i.e. DY) with Z+j from MCFM & LoopSim For p tell 1 2 M Z +Γ Z (giant K-factor!) it had to work For p t,l 1 2 M Z +Γ Z it s remarkable that it still works
71 Giant K-factors FNAL) / 31 [ nnlo results] [Z+jet] nnlo for Z+j observables K-factor wrt LO p t of Z-boson LO NLO nnlo (µ dep) nnlo (R LS dep) MCFM 5.7, CTEQ6M pp, 14 TeV anti-k t, R=0.7 p t,j1 > 200 GeV p tz distribution didn t have giant K-factors. nnlo brings no benefit To get improvement you would need exact 2-loop terms p t,z (GeV)
72 Giant K-factors FNAL) / 31 [ nnlo results] [Z+jet] nnlo for Z+j observables p t of jet 1 K-factor wrt LO LO NLO nnlo (µ dep) nnlo (R LS dep) MCFM 5.7, CTEQ6M pp, 14 TeV anti-k t, R=0.7 p t,j1 > 200 GeV p tj distribution seems to converge at nnlo scale uncertainties reduced by factor p t,j1 (GeV)
73 Giant K-factors FNAL) / 31 [ nnlo results] [Z+jet] nnlo for Z+j observables H T,jets = jets p t,j 1000 MCFM 5.7, CTEQ6M pp, 14 TeV anti-k t, R=0.7 p t,j1 > 200 GeV K-factor wrt LO LO NLO nnlo (µ dep) nnlo (R LS dep) Signficiant further enhancement for H T,jets nnlo brings clear message: H T,jets H T,jets is not a good observable! H T,jets (GeV)
74 Giant K-factors FNAL) / 31 [ nnlo results] [Z+jet] What s the problem with H T? H T (effective mass) type observables are widely used in searches H T has a steeply falling distribution (like p tj, p tz ) At each order (NLO, NNLO), an extra (soft) jet contributes to the H T sum e.g. from ISR That shifts H T up, which translates to a substantial increase in the cross section We can test this hypothesis for plain jet events, using a truncated sum, n H T,n = i=1 p t,jeti
75 Giant K-factors FNAL) / 31 [ nnlo results] [dijets] H T,n in (di)jet events H T,2 H T,3 H T, 3 pp, 7 TeV, anti-k t R=0.7 3 pp, 7 TeV, anti-k t R=0.7 3 pp, 7 TeV, anti-k t R= NLOJet++, CTEQ6M 2.5 NLOJet++, CTEQ6M 2.5 NLOJet++, CTEQ6M ratio to LO (x µ =1) ratio to LO (x µ =1) ratio to LO (x µ =1) LO NLO nnlo (µ) nnlo (R LS ) H T,2 [GeV] 0.5 LO NLO nnlo (µ) nnlo (R LS ) H T,3 [GeV] 0.5 LO NLO nnlo (µ) nnlo (R LS ) H T [GeV] A clear message: for a process with n objects at lowest order, use H T,n Do you know what gets used in your experiment s searches?
76 Giant K-factors FNAL) / 31 [Closing] Some take-home messages Be aware that giant K-factors exist Always look one order beyond the leading order, for example with MLM/CKKW matching New tool to get good predictions in such cases: LoopSim Basically an operator to generate approximations to unknown loops Combine Z+j@NLO, Z+2j@NLO to get nnlo Z+jet It sometimes works even beyond giant-k-factor regions Watch out for H T Even for simple processes, it converges very poorly unless you define it carefully (limit number of objects in sum)
77 EXTRAS Giant K-factors FNAL) / 31
78 Giant K-factors FNAL) / 31 [Extras] [How MLM works] Add Z+1jet, Z+2jet + shower Z+parton
79 Giant K-factors FNAL) / 31 [Extras] [How MLM works] Add Z+1jet, Z+2jet + shower shower Z+parton
80 Giant K-factors FNAL) / 31 [Extras] [How MLM works] Add Z+1jet, Z+2jet + shower + shower Z+parton Z+2partons
81 Giant K-factors FNAL) / 31 [Extras] [How MLM works] Add Z+1jet, Z+2jet + shower + shower Z+parton shower Z+2partons
82 Giant K-factors FNAL) / 31 [Extras] [How MLM works] Add Z+1jet, Z+2jet + shower + v. shower Z+parton shower Z+2partons shower of Z+parton generates hard gluon
83 Giant K-factors FNAL) / 31 [Extras] [How MLM works] Add Z+1jet, Z+2jet + shower + v. shower Z+parton shower Z+2partons shower of Z+parton generates hard gluon
84 Giant K-factors FNAL) / 31 [Extras] [How MLM works] Add Z+1jet, Z+2jet + shower DOUBLE COUNTING + v. shower Z+parton shower Z+2partons shower of Z+parton generates hard gluon Z + parton implicitly includes part of Z + 2 partons It s just that the 2nd parton isn t always explicitly visible
85 Giant K-factors FNAL) / 31 [Extras] [How MLM works] cartoon of MLM merging of Z+j and Z+2j + v. shower Z+parton shower Z+2partons shower of Z+parton generates hard gluon MLM merging relies on parton shower to help figure out what fraction of Z + parton is really Z + 2 partons. In a few slides, we will try to do that without the parton shower
86 Giant K-factors FNAL) / 31 [Extras] [How MLM works] cartoon of MLM merging of Z+j and Z+2j ACCEPT ACCEPT REJECT Q merge p t cut + v. shower Z+parton shower Z+2partons shower of Z+parton generates hard gluon MLM merging relies on parton shower to help figure out what fraction of Z + parton is really Z + 2 partons. In a few slides, we will try to do that without the parton shower
87 Giant K-factors FNAL) / 31 [Extras] [How MLM works] cartoon of MLM merging of Z+j and Z+2j ACCEPT ACCEPT REJECT Q merge p t cut + v. shower Z+parton shower Z+2partons shower of Z+parton generates hard gluon MLM merging relies on parton shower to help figure out what fraction of Z + parton is really Z + 2 partons. In a few slides, we will try to do that without the parton shower
88 [Extras] [LoopSim details] cartoon of the LoopSim idea SUBTRACT + Z+parton Z+2partons Z+1parton softest particle of Z+2 is "looped" = removed from event (kinematics reshuffled) For every Z + 2 parton (2 3) event, figure out what what 2 2 event it would really have come from Loop the softest parton [Don t actually explicitly calculate any loop diagrams: simulate the loops] Subtract that 2 2 event Unlike MLM, no cutoffs on 2 3 events If done properly, divergences will cancel Giant K-factors (@ FNAL) / 31
89 Giant K-factors FNAL) / 31 [Extras] [LoopSim details] cartoon of LoopSim looping procedure (a) Input event (b) Attributed emission seq (c) Born particle ID (d) Output 1 loop event (e) 2nd output 1 loop event (f) Output 2 loop event Use jet algorithm to assign a branching structure to event The particles that are softest are the ones that will be looped à la CKKW
90 Giant K-factors FNAL) / 31 [Extras] [LoopSim details] nlo accuracy Define operators: U l (event E) all simulated l-loop events from E U (event) l=0 U l (event) U stands for unitarisation (cancellation of all divergences) sum of all diagrams (essentially) adds up to zero To combine Z+j with Z+2j take Z+j@ nlo Z+j@LO + U (Z+2j@LO) we use nlo to emphasize that this is a crude approximation to an actual NLO calculation the exact loops are missing NB: U here includes l = 0,1
91 Giant K-factors FNAL) / 31 [Extras] [LoopSim details] nnlo: merging Z+j and Z+2j, Just replace simulated loops with exact loops Apply LoopSim to exact 1-loop to get (e.g.) simulated 2-loop terms E n,l event with n partons and l exact loops U,l operator to apply when l exact loops known U,1 (E n,0 ) = U (E n,0 ) U (U 1 (E n,0 )) U,1 (E n,1 ) = U (E n,1 ) Z+j@ nnlo = Z+j@NLO+U,1 (Z+2j@NLO only ) Extension to NLO, NNLO, multi-leg, etc. is almost trivial in LoopSim Not the case in methods that merge with parton showers too
LHC searches: what role for QCD?
LHC searches: what role for QCD? Gavin Salam LPTHE, CNRS and UPMC (Univ. Paris 6) Aspen Center for Physics 25 May 2010 Including examples based on work with Butterworth, Cacciari, Davison, Plehn, Rojo,
QCD at hadron colliders Lecture 2: Showers, Jets and fixed-order predictions
QCD at hadron colliders Lecture 2: Showers, Jets and fixed-order predictions Gavin Salam CERN, Princeton & LPTHE/CNRS (Paris) Maria Laach Herbtschule für Hochenenergiephysik September 20, Germany QCD lecture
Jets at LHCb. Gavin Salam. LHCb, CERN, 21 January CERN, Princeton & LPTHE/CNRS (Paris)
Jets at LHCb Gavin Salam CERN, Princeton & LPTHE/CNRS (Paris) LHCb, CERN, 21 January 2011 Jets @ LHCb (G. Salam) CERN, 2011-01-21 2 / 16 Any process that involves final-state partons gives jets Examples
QCD and jets physics at the LHC with CMS during the first year of data taking. Pavel Demin UCL/FYNU Louvain-la-Neuve
QCD and jets physics at the LHC with CMS during the first year of data taking Pavel Demin UCL/FYNU Louvain-la-Neuve February 8, 2006 Bon appétit! February 8, 2006 Pavel Demin UCL/FYNU 1 Why this seminar?
Measurement of jet production in association with a Z boson at the LHC & Jet energy correction & calibration at HLT in CMS
Measurement of jet production in association with a Z boson at the LHC & Jet energy correction & calibration at HLT in CMS Fengwangdong Zhang Peking University (PKU) & Université Libre de Bruxelles (ULB)
QCD in hadron collisions
QCD in hadron collisions Gavin Salam CERN, Princeton University & LPTHE/CNRS (Paris) XXVI Rencontres de Physiue de la Vallée d Aoste La Thuile, Italy, February 26 March 3 2012 Gavin Salam (CERN/Princeton/CNRS)
W/Z + jets and W/Z + heavy flavor production at the LHC
W/Z + jets and W/Z + heavy flavor production at the LHC A. Paramonov (ANL) on behalf of the ATLAS and CMS collaborations Moriond QCD 2012 Motivation for studies of jets produced with a W or Z boson Standard
Thoughts on QCD for Run 2
ATLAS Standard Model Workshop, Lessons from Run 1 and Preparation for Run 2 Annecy, February 2014 Thoughts on QCD for Run 2 Gavin Salam (CERN) 1 Why SM studies? Test and extend our understanding of QCD
July 8, 2015, Pittsburgh. Jets. Zoltan Nagy DESY
July 8, 2015, Pittsburgh Jets Zoltan Nagy DESY What are Jets? A di-jet ATLAS event A multi-jet (6-jet) event What are Jets? What are Jets? The pt is concentrated in a few narrow sprays of particles These
Understanding Parton Showers
Understanding Parton Showers Zoltán Nagy DESY in collaboration with Dave Soper Introduction Pile-up events 7 vertices 2009 single vertex reconstructed! 2011 2010 4 vertices 25 vertices 2012 Introduction
Recent QCD results from ATLAS
Recent QCD results from ATLAS PASCOS 2013 Vojtech Pleskot Charles University in Prague 21.11.2013 Introduction / Outline Soft QCD: Underlying event in jet events @7TeV (2010 data) Hard double parton interactions
Precision Calculations for Collider Physics
SFB Arbeitstreffen März 2005 Precision Calculations for Collider Physics Michael Krämer (RWTH Aachen) Radiative corrections to Higgs and gauge boson production Combining NLO calculations with parton showers
Measurements of the production of a vector boson in association with jets in the ATLAS and CMS detectors
Measurements of the production of a vector boson in association with s in the ALAS and CMS detectors Vieri Candelise University of rieste and INFN rieste, Via Valerio 2, 3428, rieste, Italy Abstract. he
Physics at LHC. lecture one. Sven-Olaf Moch. DESY, Zeuthen. in collaboration with Martin zur Nedden
Physics at LHC lecture one Sven-Olaf Moch Sven-Olaf.Moch@desy.de DESY, Zeuthen in collaboration with Martin zur Nedden Humboldt-Universität, October 22, 2007, Berlin Sven-Olaf Moch Physics at LHC p.1 LHC
ATLAS-CONF October 15, 2010
ATLAS-CONF-2010-096 October 15, 2010 Data-driven background estimation for the H τ + τ τ h search at 7 TeV with the ATLAS detector Ian Howley 7 December 2010 1 Motivation One of the primary LHC physics
Higgs Production at LHC
Higgs Production at LHC Vittorio Del Duca INFN Torino Havana 3 April 2006 1 In proton collisions at 14 TeV, and for the Higgs is produced mostly via M H > 100 GeV gluon fusion gg H largest rate for all
Theoretical Predictions For Top Quark Pair Production At NLO QCD
Theoretical Predictions For Top Quark Pair Production At NLO QCD Malgorzata Worek Wuppertal Uni. HP2: High Precision for Hard Processes, 4-7 September 2012, MPI, Munich 1 Motivations Successful running
QCD in hadron collisions
QCD in hadron collisions Gavin Salam CERN, Princeton University & LPTHE/CNRS (Paris) Rencontres de Physiue des Particules Montpellier, 14 16 May 2012 Gavin Salam (CERN/Princeton/CNRS) QCD in hadron collisions
Physics at Hadron Colliders Part II
Physics at Hadron Colliders Part II Marina Cobal Università di Udine 1 The structure of an event One incoming parton from each of the protons enters the hard process, where then a number of outgoing particles
Jets, underlying event and HIC
Jets, underlying event and HIC Gavin P. Salam LPTHE, UPMC Paris 6 & CNRS From Particles and Partons to Nuclei and Fields: An international workshop and symposium in honor of Al Mueller s 70th birthday
Proton anti proton collisions at 1.96 TeV currently highest centre of mass energy
Tevatron & Experiments 2 Proton anti proton collisions at 1.96 TeV currently highest centre of mass energy Tevatron performing very well 6.5 fb 1 delivered (per experiment) 2 fb 1 recorded in 2008 alone
PDFs for Event Generators: Why? Stephen Mrenna CD/CMS Fermilab
PDFs for Event Generators: Why? Stephen Mrenna CD/CMS Fermilab 1 Understanding Cross Sections @ LHC: many pieces to the puzzle LO, NLO and NNLO calculations K-factors Benchmark cross sections and pdf correlations
Miguel Villaplana Università degli Studi e INFN Milano. on behalf of the ATLAS Collaboration. September 11, 2017
Measurement of photon (also +jets) production cross sections, jets production cross sections and extraction of the strong coupling constant ISMD2017 Tlaxcala City, Mexico Miguel Villaplana Università degli
W/Z production with 2b at NLO
W/Z production with b at NLO Laura Reina Eugene, September 9 Motivations: main background to W H/ZH associated production; single-top production; H/A + b b and other signals of new physics; t t production;
Jet Matching at Hadron Colliders. Johan Alwall National Taiwan University
Jet Matching at Hadron Colliders Johan Alwall National Taiwan University IPMU Focus week, Tokyo, Japan, 12 Nov 2009 Why jet matching? Many (all) interesting New Physics signals at hadron colliders include
Fully exclusive NNLO QCD computations
Fully exclusive NNLO QCD computations Kirill Melnikov University of Hawaii Loopfest V, SLAC, June 2006 Fully exclusive NNLO QCD computations p. 1/20 Outline Introduction Technology Higgs boson production
Measurement of EW production! of Z+2j at the LHC
Measurement of EW production! of Z+j at the LHC Frontiers of Fundamental Physics, Marseille Kiran Joshi On behalf the ATLAS and CMS collaborations /7/ Overview Introduction and motivation ATLAS measurement
W/Z+jet results from the Tevatron
W/Z+jet results from the Tevatron Dmitry Bandurin Florida State University On behalf of D0 and CDF Collaborations Moriond QCD 2012, March 15, La Thuile, Italy Precision QCD tests Photon, W, Z etc. p parton
Jets, UE and early LHC data
Jets, UE and early LHC data Gavin P. Salam LPTHE, UPMC Paris 6 & CNRS LHC@BNL Joint Theory/Experiment Workshop on Early Physics at the LHC 8 February 2010 Brookhaven National Laboratory, Upton, USA Based
QCD Phenomenology at High Energy
QCD Phenomenology at High Energy CERN Academic Training Lectures 18-21 February 2008 Lecture 5: Matching Fixed Order Matrix Elements with Parton Showers ME-PS Matching Two rather different objectives:
Overview of PDF-sensitive measurements from Run I in ATLAS
Overview of PDF-sensitive measurements from Run I in ATLAS on behalf of ATLAS Parton Distributions for the LHC 05 February 5- ATLAS SM Measurements Traditional processes for PDF fits include jets, Drell-Yan
Higher order QCD corrections to the Drell-Yan process
Higher order QCD corrections to the Drell-Yan process Massimiliano Grazzini (INFN, Firenze) Milano, march 18, 2009 Outline Introduction NLL+LO resummation NNLO calculation Summary & Outlook Introduction
The forward-backward asymmetry in electron-positron annihilation. Stefan Weinzierl
The forward-backward asymmetry in electron-positron annihilation Stefan Weinzierl Universität Mainz Introduction: I.: II: III: IV.: Electroweak precision physics Higher order corrections Infrared-safe
Searches for Natural SUSY with RPV. Andrey Katz. C. Brust, AK, R. Sundrum, Z. Han, AK, M. Son, B. Tweedie, 1210.XXXX. Harvard University
Searches for C. Brust, AK, R. Sundrum, 126.2353 Z. Han, AK, M. Son, B. Tweedie, 121.XXXX Harvard University Frontiers Beyond the Standard Model III, Minneapolis, October 13, 212 (Harvard) October, 13 1
News in jet algorithms:
News in jet algorithms: SISCone and anti-k t Grégory Soyez Brookhaven National Laboratory G.P. Salam, G. Soyez, JHEP 5 (7) 86 [arxiv:74.292] M. Cacciari, G.P. Salam, G. Soyez, JHEP 4 (8) 63 [arxiv:82.1189]
Towards Jetography. Gavin Salam. LPTHE, CNRS and UPMC (Univ. Paris 6)
Towards Jetography Gavin Salam LPTHE, CNRS and UPMC (Univ. Paris 6) Based on work with Jon Butterworth, Matteo Cacciari, Mrinal Dasgupta, Adam Davison, Lorenzo Magnea, Juan Rojo, Mathieu Rubin & Gregory
Status of Higgs and jet physics. Andrea Banfi
Status of Higgs and jet physics Andrea Banfi Outline Importance of jet physics in LHC Higgs analyses Zero-jet cross section NNLL+NNLO resummations Progress in Monte Carlo event generators One-jet cross
Jets in Higgs Analysis
Jets in Higgs Analysis Conveners: Daniele del Re (CMS), Bruce Mellado (ATLAS), Gavin Salam (theory) & Frank Tackmann (theory) CERN, LPTHE/CNRS (Paris) & Princeton University 7th meeting of the LHC Higgs
QCD at CDF. Régis Lefèvre IFAE Barcelona On behalf of the CDF Collaboration
QCD at CDF Régis Lefèvre IFAE Barcelona On behalf of the CDF Collaboration Jet Inclusive Cross-Section Underlying event studies Jet Shapes Specific processes _ W+Jets, γ + γ, γ + b/c, b-jet / bb jet Diffraction
PoS(ICHEP2012)300. Electroweak boson production at LHCb
Physik-Institut der Universität Zürich, Switzerland. E-mail: jonathan.anderson@cern.ch The electroweak boson production cross-sections have been measured in the forward region using s = 7 TeV proton-proton
VH production at the LHC: recent theory progress
VH production at the LHC: recent theory progress Giancarlo Ferrera Università di Milano & INFN Milano LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group CERN June 12th 214 Motivations Associated vector boson Higgs
MINLO. Multiscale Improved NLO. Giulia Zanderighi University of Oxford & STFC
MINLO Multiscale Improved NLO Giulia Zanderighi University of Oxford & STFC Work done in collaboration with Keith Hamilton and Paolo Nason 1206.3572 Summer School and Workshop on the Standard Model and
Measurement of Z+ Jets Cross-Section at ATLAS
Measurement of Z+ Jets Cross-Section at The collaboration Abstract The production of a W or Z boson in conjunction with jets is an interesting process in its own right as well as a signal channel (and
Towards Jet Cross Sections at NNLO
Towards Jet Cross Sections at HP.4, September, MPI Munich Expectations at LHC Large production rates for Standard Model processes single jet inclusive and differential di-jet cross section will be measured
On QCD jet mass distributions at LHC
On QCD jet mass distributions at LHC Kamel Khelifa-Kerfa (USTHB) with M. Dasgupta, S. Marzani & M. Spannowsky CIPSA 2013 30 th Sep - 2 nd Oct 2013 Constantine, Algeria Outline 1 Jet substructure 2 Jet
AN INTRODUCTION TO QCD
AN INTRODUCTION TO QCD Frank Petriello Northwestern U. & ANL TASI 2013: The Higgs Boson and Beyond June 3-7, 2013 1 Outline We ll begin with motivation for the continued study of QCD, especially in the
Physics at the Large Hadron Collider
Herbstschule Maria Laach, September 2005 Physics at the Large Hadron Collider Michael Krämer (RWTH Aachen) Lecture 1: Review of the Standard Model Lecture 2: SM physics at hadron colliders Lecture 3: Higgs
Tests of QCD Using Jets at CMS. Salim CERCI Adiyaman University On behalf of the CMS Collaboration IPM /10/2017
Tests of QCD Using Jets at CMS Salim CERCI Adiyaman University On behalf of the CMS Collaboration IPM-2017 24/10/2017 2/25 Outline Introduction QCD at LHC QCD measurements on the LHC data Jets The strong
João Pires Universita di Milano-Bicocca and Universita di Genova, INFN sezione di Genova. HP September 2014 Florence, Italy
Jets in pp at NNLO João Pires Universita di Milano-Bicocca and Universita di Genova, INFN sezione di Genova HP.5-5 September 014 Florence, Italy based on: Second order QCD corrections to gluonic jet production
Recent developments in the POWHEG BOX
Recent developments in the POWHEG BOX Emanuele Re IPPP, Durham University Standard Model @ LHC Durham, 12 April 2011 in collaboration with S. Alioli, K. Hamilton, P. Nason and C. Oleari Outline Quick description
Event shapes in hadronic collisions
Event shapes in hadronic collisions Andrea Banfi ETH Zürich SM@LHC - Durham - April Event shapes at hadron colliders Event shapes are combinations of hadron momenta in a number related to the geometry
Precision QCD at the Tevatron. Markus Wobisch, Fermilab for the CDF and DØ Collaborations
Precision QCD at the Tevatron Markus Wobisch, Fermilab for the CDF and DØ Collaborations Fermilab Tevatron - Run II Chicago Ecm: 1.8 1.96 TeV more Bunches 6 36 Bunch Crossing 3500 396ns CDF Booster Tevatron
Jet Substructure. Adam Davison. University College London
Jet Substructure Adam Davison University College London 1 Outline Jets at the LHC Machine and ATLAS detector What is a jet? Jet substructure What is it? What can it do for us? Some ATLAS/Higgs bias here
Bound-state effects in ttbar production at the LHC
1 Bound-state effects in ttbar production at the LHC Hiroshi YOKOYA (National Taiwan University) based on works in collaboration with K.Hagiwara(KEK) and Y.Sumino(Tohoku U) GGI workshop, Firenze, 2011.09.28
Vector boson + jets at NLO vs. LHC data
Vector boson + jets at NLO vs. LHC data Lance Dixon (SLAC) for the BlackHat collaboration Z. Bern, LD, G. Diana, F. Febres Cordero, S. Höche, H. Ita, D. Kosower, D. Maître, K. Ozeren LHC Theory Workshop
PDF Studies at LHCb! Simone Bifani. On behalf of the LHCb collaboration. University of Birmingham (UK)
PDF Studies at LHCb! Simone Bifani University of Birmingham (UK) On behalf of the LHCb collaboration MENU 213 Rome 3th September - 4th October 213 Outline Introduction Analyses» Z/γ* ll, l =, e, τ#» W
Fiducial cross sections for Higgs boson production in association with a jet at next-to-next-to-leading order in QCD. Abstract
CERN-PH-TH-2015-192 TTP15-030 Fiducial cross sections for Higgs boson production in association with a jet at next-to-next-to-leading order in QCD Fabrizio Caola, 1, Kirill Melnikov, 2, and Markus Schulze
Azimuthal decorrelations between jets in QCD
Azimuthal decorrelations between jets in QCD Andrea Banfi ETH Zurich q q p 1 p 1 Outline Azimuthal decorrelations in QCD hard processes Dijets in the back-to-back region Phenomenology of azimuthal decorrelations
Top production measurements using the ATLAS detector at the LHC
Top production measurements using the ATLAS detector at the LHC INFN, Sezione di Bologna and University of Bologna E-mail: romano@bo.infn.it This paper is an overview of recent results on top-quark production
NNLOPS predictions for Higgs boson production
NNLOPS predictions for Higgs boson production Emanuele Re Rudolf Peierls Centre for Theoretical Physics, University of Oxford GGI Florence, 12 September 2014 Outline brief motivation method used results
Constraints on Higgs-boson width using H*(125) VV events
Constraints on Higgs-boson width using H*(125) VV events Roberto Covarelli ( University / INFN of Torino ) on behalf of the CMS and ATLAS collaborations 25th International Workshop on Weak Interactions
Bound-State Effects on Kinematical Distributions of Top-Quarks at Hadron Colliders
1 Bound-State Effects on Kinematical Distributions of Top-Quarks at Hadron Colliders Hiroshi YOKOYA (CERN-Japan Fellow) based on arxiv:1007.0075 in collaboration with Y. Sumino (Tohoku univ.) 2 Outline
Non-perturbative effects in transverse momentum distribution of electroweak bosons
Non-perturbative effects in transverse momentum distribution of electroweak bosons Andrzej Siódmok a,e in collaboration with M. H. Seymour b,c & S. Gieseke b,d a Jagiellonian University, b CERN, c University
Probing Dark Matter at the LHC
July 15, 2016 PPC2016 1 Probing Dark Matter at the LHC SM SM DM DM Search for production of DM particles from interacting SM particles Models tested at ATLAS assume DM WIMP Infer DM production through
QCD in gauge-boson production at the LHC "
QCD in gauge-boson production at the LHC " " Matthias Schott " on behalf of the ATLAS and CMS Collaborations" Prof. Dr. Matthias Schott What can we learn " from those tests?" Inclusive and differential
Boosted Top Resonance Searches at CMS
Boosted Top Resonance Searches at CMS Justin Pilot, UC Davis on behalf of the CMS Collaboration Northwest Terascale Workshop, Using Jet Substructure University of Oregon 5 April 013 Introduction Many new
SUSY-Yukawa Sum Rule at the LHC
SUSY-Yukawa Sum Rule at the LHC David Curtin bla arxiv:1004.5350, arxiv:xxxx.xxxx In Collaboration with Maxim Perelstein, Monika Blanke bla Cornell Institute for High Energy Phenomenology SUSY 2010 Parallel
Physics at Hadron Colliders
Physics at Hadron Colliders Part 2 Standard Model Physics Test of Quantum Chromodynamics - Jet production - W/Z production - Production of Top quarks Precision measurements -W mass - Top-quark mass QCD
Measurement of photon production cross sections also in association with jets with the ATLAS detector
Nuclear and Particle Physics Proceedings 00 (07) 6 Nuclear and Particle Physics Proceedings Measurement of photon production cross sections also in association with jets with the detector Sebastien Prince
V+jets in ATLAS. Mein Text Text Mein Text Mein Text
V+jets in ATLAS Mein Text Text Mein Text Mein Text V+jets in ATLAS Mein Text Text Mein Text Mein Text V+jets in ATLAS Mein Text Text Mein Text Mein Text V+jets in ATLAS Production of jets in association
Jet reconstruction in W + jets events at the LHC
Jet reconstruction in W + jets events at the LHC Ulrike Schnoor Michigan State University High Energy Physics Institutsseminar IKTP TU Dresden, Nov 4, 010 Jet reconstruction in W + jets events at the LHC
Discovery potential of the SM Higgs with ATLAS
Discovery potential of the SM Higgs with P. Fleischmann On behalf of the Collaboration st October Abstract The discovery potential of the Standard Model Higgs boson with the experiment at the Large Hadron
W+jets production at the LHC: a comparison of perturbative tools (working title)
W+jets production at the LHC: a comparison of perturbative tools (working title) J. Andersen, J. Huston 2, D. Maitre 3,4, S. Sapeta 5, G.P. Salam 3,5,6, J. Smillie 7, J. Winter 3 CP 3 -Origins, Campusvej
Electroweak Physics at the Tevatron
Electroweak Physics at the Tevatron Adam Lyon / Fermilab for the DØ and CDF collaborations 15 th Topical Conference on Hadron Collider Physics June 2004 Outline Importance Methodology Single Boson Measurements
Multi-differential jet cross sections in CMS
Multi-differential jet cross sections in CMS A. Bermudez Martinez on behalf of the CMS collaboration. Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron (DESY) April 07 A. Bermudez (DESY) April 07 / 5 QCD Main background
Direct measurement of the W boson production charge asymmetry at CDF
Direct measurement of the boson production charge asymmetry at CDF Eva Halkiadakis Rutgers University For the CDF collaboration Joint Experimental-Theoretical Physics Seminar Fermilab May 22 2009 Outline
Automation of NLO computations using the FKS subtraction method
Automation of NLO computations using the FKS subtraction method Institute for Theoretical Physics, Universität Zürich E-mail: frederix@physik.uzh.ch In this talk the FKS subtraction method for next-to-leading
What to do with Multijet Events?
DØ note 4465 2004-06-03 What to do with Multijet Events? T. Hebbeker RWTH Aachen ABSTRACT Multijet events are frequently produced in p p collisions. Events with several jets might indicate physics beyond
Higgs-related SM Measurements at ATLAS
Higgs-related SM Measurements at ATLAS Junjie Zhu University of Michigan 2 nd MCTP Spring Symposium on Higgs Boson Physics Outline Introduction Isolated γγ cross section (37 pb -1, Phys. Rev. D 85, 012003
Interpretations of Early LHC Jets + MET Searches
Interpretations of Early LHC Jets + MET Searches Eder Izaguirre SLAC/Stanford University December 10, 2010 WCLHC Meeting With: Daniele Alves and Jay G. Wacker Based on: arxiv:1003.3886, arxiv:1008.0407
Highlights of top quark measurements in hadronic final states at ATLAS
Highlights of top quark measurements in hadronic final states at ATLAS Serena Palazzo 1,2,, on behalf of the ATLAS Collaboration 1 Università della Calabria 2 INFN Cosenza Abstract. Measurements of inclusive
SUSY searches at LHC and HL-LHC perspectives
SUSY searches at LHC and HL-LHC perspectives Maximilian Goblirsch-Kolb, on behalf of the ATLAS and CMS collaborations 26.10.2017, LCWS 2017, Strasbourg SUSY particle production in p-p collisions Two main
Transverse Energy-Energy Correlation on Hadron Collider. Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron
Transverse Energy-Energy Correlation on Hadron Collider Wei Wang ( 王伟 ) Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron Work with Ahmed Ali, Fernando Barreiro, Javier Llorente arxiv: 1205.1689, Phys.Rev. D86, 114017(2012)
Multijet merging at NLO
Multijet merging at Institute for Particle Physics Phenomenology 09/0/0 arxiv:.0, arxiv:0.588 arxiv:07.5030, arxiv:07.503 arxiv:08.85 Multijet merging at 0000 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00 00000 00000 00000 00000
Higher Order Corrections to the Drell-Yan Cross Section in the Mellin Space
Higher Order Corrections to the Drell-Yan Cross Section in the Mellin Space Petra Kovačíková (DESY, Zeuthen) petra.kovacikova@desy.de Corfu Summer School 4 th September 21 Higher Order Corrections to the
Study of H γγ at NLO and NNLO
Study of H γγ at NLO and NNLO G. Dissertori A. Holzner, F. Stöckli ETH Zürich Apr 13, 2005 Introduction Recently obtained : Higgs production (via gluon fusion) at NNLO (QCD), fully differential Anastasiou,
Outline Motivations for ILC: e + e γ/z q qg LHC: pp l + l + jet (q q l + l g + qg l + l q + qg l + l q) Existing literature The complete EW one-loop c
Complete electroweak corrections to e + e 3 jets C.M. Carloni Calame INFN & University of Southampton Workshop LC08: e + e Physics at TeV scale September 22-25, 2008 in collaboration with S. Moretti, F.
Shapes at hadron colliders
Shape variables at hadron colliders ETH Zürich Work done in collaboration with Gavin Salam (LPTHE Jussieu), Giulia Zanderighi (Oxford) and Mrinal Dasgupta, Kamel Khelifa-Kerfa, Simone Marzani (Manchester)
Event Generator Physics 1
Event Generator Physics University of Cambridge 1st MCnet School, IPPP Durham 18 th 20 th April 2007 See also ESW: QCD and Collider Physics, C.U.P. 1996 http://www.hep.phy.cam.ac.uk/theory/webber/qcdupdates.html
Z+jet production at the LHC: Electroweak radiative corrections
Z+jet production at the LHC: Electroweak radiative corrections Ansgar Denner Universität Würzburg, Institut für Theoretische Physik und Astrophysik Am Hubland, 9774 Würzburg, Germany E-mail: denner@physik.uni-wuerzburg.de
arxiv: v1 [hep-ex] 24 Oct 2017
![arxiv: v1 [hep-ex] 24 Oct 2017](/thumbs/96/128296086.jpg "arxiv: v1 [hep-ex] 24 Oct 2017")
Production of electroweak bosons in association with jets with the ATLAS detector arxiv:1710.08857v1 [hep-ex] 24 Oct 2017 S. Spagnolo on behalf of the ATLAS Collaboration INFN Lecce and Dip. di Matematica
Testing QCD at the LHC and the Implications of HERA DIS 2004
Testing QCD at the LHC and the Implications of HERA DIS 2004 Jon Butterworth Impact of the LHC on QCD Impact of QCD (and HERA data) at the LHC Impact of the LHC on QCD The LHC will have something to say
Measurements of the vector boson production with the ATLAS detector
Measurements of the vector boson production with the ATLAS detector A. Lapertosa 1,2,, on behalf of the ATLAS Collaboration 1 Università degli Studi di Genova 2 INFN Sezione di Genova Abstract. Measurements
Status of ATLAS and CMS
Status of ATLAS and CMS A. Di Simone Università & INFN Roma Tor Vergata On behalf of the ATLAS and CMS collaborations High precision for Hard Processes at the LHC GGI, Arcetri, 14-17/09/2010 Outline Introduction
SM Predictions for Gluon- Fusion Higgs Production
SM Predictions for Gluon- Fusion Higgs Production Massimiliano Grazzini, Frank Petriello, Jianming Qian, Fabian Stoeckli Higgs Workshop, CERN, June 5, 2010 Outline Introduction: status of ggh Three updates:
Matrix Elements for the LHC. J. Huston Michigan State University, IPPP Durham
Matrix Elements for the LHC J. Huston Michigan State University, IPPP Durham Some references CHS over 1500 downloads so far goal is to provide a reasonably global picture of LHC calculations (with rules
The Heavy Quark Search at the LHC
The Heavy Quark Search at the LHC The Heavy Quark Search at the LHC Backgrounds: estimating and suppressing tt, multijets,... jet mass technique NLO effects matrix elements for extra jets initial state
EW theoretical uncertainties on the W mass measurement
EW theoretical uncertainties on the W mass measurement Luca Barze 1, Carlo Carloni Calame 2, Homero Martinez 3, Guido Montagna 2, Oreste Nicrosini 3, Fulvio Piccinini 3, Alessandro Vicini 4 1 CERN 2 Universita
Precision Jet Physics At the LHC
Precision Jet Physics At the LHC Matthew Schwartz Harvard University JETS AT THE LHC An (almost) universal feature of SUSY is and Source: Atlas TDR SIGNAL VS. BACKGROUND Source: Atlas TDR Can we trust
Top Jets & Boosted QCD the LHC
Top Jets & Boosted QCD Jets @ the LHC Seung J. Lee YITP, Stony Brook University with L. Almeida, G. Perez, G. Sterman, I. Sung, J. Virzi with L. Almeida, G. Perez, I. Sung, J. Virzi arxiv:0807.0234, work